A. Error of mistake: Although the Defendant was fluort with the victim’s fluort, the Defendant did not have any fact that the victim’s mart was flut.

B. Unreasonable sentencing: The sentence imposed by the lower court (a fine of eight million won, etc.) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The following facts and circumstances acknowledged by the court below and the court below's decision on the assertion of mistake of facts are consistent with the statement on the situation immediately after the victim's case, i.e., ① the victim made a consistent statement from the investigative agency to the court to the effect that "the victim was forced to get off the defendant's hand and her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her.".

The judgment of the court below is just, and there is no error of misconception of facts or misapprehension of legal principles as alleged by the defendant.

B. There is no change in the sentencing conditions compared to the judgment of the first instance court on the assertion of unfair sentencing, and the sentencing of the first instance court is discretionary.